Recommended Posts

There are 73.986 backers only in the Kickstarter main page. 73.986. Do their opinions not matter? I know Obsidian has the last say but... is it not possible to even offer that option to the backers? To ask them what would they rather have via email/poll?

You sure you'd want this? You seem pretty confident that if Obsidian were to email/poll us about Romances in PoE, that the result would be a majority of backers voting "Yes, do them", instead of the most likely result(s): a decisive "hell no", or a "meh", or a "please spend our funding dollars elsewhere", which would immensely hurt the pro-mancer argument...forever.

By the way, Objectively speaking, Romances are not in the Infinity engine game tradition. Only 2 out of the 5 IE games had them. (1 out of 5 if you exclude PS:T's, which I wouldn't call a romance. It was a 3 line flirt session w/ Annah). Romances are the exception to the rule in the IE games. Their absence wouldn't make PoE seem any less IE-like.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Stun

4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There are 73.986 backers only in the Kickstarter main page. 73.986. Do their opinions not matter? I know Obsidian has the last say but... is it not possible to even offer that option to the backers? To ask them what would they rather have via email/poll?

You sure you'd want this? You seem pretty confident that if Obsidian were to email/poll us about Romances in PoE, that the result would be a majority of backers voting "Yes, do romances", instead of the most likely result: a decisive "hell no", or a "meh", which wouldn't do the Pro-mance side of the discussion any favors.

By the way, Objectively speaking, Romances are not in the Infinity engine game tradition. Only 2 out of the 5 IE games had them. (1 out of 5 if you exclude PS:T's, which I wouldn't call a romance. It was a 3 line flirt session). It's an exception to the rule. It's Omission wouldn't make PoE seem any less IE-like.

I am pretty sure I would want that, yes. Just because it would be nice to be at least asked about that subject. Also, I am curious about what the backers would respond if given the option of reaching a compromise like less dungeons/ more roleplaying options. Not that is gonna change anything with the game being feature locked and all but if it wasn't and if Obsi were to offer said option I would be totally fine with what the majority would decide in that case. Really, not such a big deal.

But here is the problem, I don't see romances as a prelude to sex or a reward in that regard but a relationship that happens to make you very close to somebody, also psyshically, so yes, I consider the relationships with Annah, Fall-From-Grace a romance. You are right though, only 2 of 5 games had romances but I think most of us think of BG2 when they think of the Baldur's saga mostly because of the improvement in roleplaying options over the first installment is overwhelming. Also both Torment and BG2 are the most popular and fan favourites for the most of us so it's not unreasonable to think that those are the bar to top. But again, you are right, you can arm a case either way.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Also, I am curious about what the backers would respond if given the option of reaching a compromise like less dungeons/ more roleplaying options.

What makes you think PoE's gameplay makeup isn't already more Role playing options and less dungeons? Or a decent 50/50 split? Sheesh, I thought the "OMG Icewind Dale 3!" worries would have ended the moment they showed us those scripted interaction screenshots, which they promised would be very common in the game.

And what does Role playing have to do with anything? Romances aren't role playing. They're dating sim minigames. The only "role playing" options that happen in romances are "should I role play the attentive listener/strong shoulder, or should I be the insensitive ****?

5

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

What makes you think PoE's gameplay makeup isn't already more Role playing options and less dungeons? Or a decent 50/50 split? Sheesh, I thought the "OMG Icewind Dale 3!" worries would have ended the moment they showed us those scripted interaction screenshots, which they promised would be very common in the game.

And what does Role playing have to do with anything? Romances aren't role playing. They're dating sim minigames. The only "role playing" options that happen in romances are "should I role play the attentive listener/strong shoulder, or should I be the insensitive ****?

Hypothetically they could be role playing. Lets say a girl could be romanced, but there was more than 1 way to do so. If you had high RES you could convince her to love you by being a smooth talker, but if not you might have to impress her with your big muscles a la MIG. It wouldn't be as much of a matter of CAN you convince her to like you, but instead HOW you get her to like you.

I also feel they can give you a greater sense of purpose in your decision making. In Bg2 TOB: I was planning on becoming a god, but the thought of leaving Anomen behind made me a bit sad. When it came time to choose whether or not to ascend at the end; it really felt like a tough decision.

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's neither of those. You are just letting the devs know where the majority stands. They are the ones deciding, that's why they are the devs.

Also, I am curious about what the backers would respond if given the option of reaching a compromise like less dungeons/ more roleplaying options.

What makes you think PoE's gameplay makeup isn't already more Role playing options and less dungeons? Or a decent 50/50 split? Sheesh, I thought the "OMG Icewind Dale 3!" worries would have ended the moment they showed us those scripted interaction screenshots, which they promised would be very common in the game.

And what does Role playing have to do with anything? Romances aren't role playing. They're dating sim minigames. The only "role playing" options that happen in romances are "should I role play the attentive listener/strong shoulder, or should I be the insensitive ****?

That's why this post talk was about concerns, not certainties. In any case, you cannot deny there is a lot of emphasis in non roleplaying options like endless dungeons and such.

Just out of curiousity, do you consider the romances in BG2 romances or a sim date? Because if it is the latter, you might as well start calling your companions "friendship sim mini games" and every dialogue that you choose in the game "character decision sim mini game". No, you are wrong. Romances ARE roleplaying as much as friendships or responding to any NPC are. Why? Because you are roleplaying a character, you are pretending to act like him/her. You can decide if you want to do something, say something and how. That's why there are always multiple answers in any good cRPG. They are leaving the player room to roleplay their character. To decide how they want to behave and that applies to every NPC and kind of relationship you are going to have in said game. The only difference between "friendship" dialogue and "romance" dialogue is the notion that you have of friendship and romance, but mechanically they are the same thing and the obey the same propose AKA roleplaying.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

And what does Role playing have to do with anything? Romances aren't role playing. They're dating sim minigames. The only "role playing" options that happen in romances are "should I role play the attentive listener/strong shoulder, or should I be the insensitive ****?

To be fair, there is roleplaying potential in the general concept of "romances". The implementation is usually terrible, but that doesn't mean the basic premise has no value from a storytelling and roleplaying standpoint. I don't think "romances" are intrinsically any worse (or better) than friendships or any other type of relationship, despite failing to hit the mark much more often. I'd be more inclined to blame that tendency to the writers and they're preconceived notion of what "romance" should be like rather than the concept itself.

It's hardly a video game only problem, by the way. And it's not just good writers who fall for it, really. To me that Chris Avellone interview where he was questioned on the topic actually suggests in a really ironic way that he himself is affected by the same attitude.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Prince of Wales

1

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

And what does Role playing have to do with anything? Romances aren't role playing. They're dating sim minigames. The only "role playing" options that happen in romances are "should I role play the attentive listener/strong shoulder, or should I be the insensitive ****?

To be fair, there is roleplaying potential in the general concept of "romances". The implementation is usually terrible, but that doesn't mean the basic premise has no value from a storytelling and roleplaying standpoint. I don't think "romances" are intrinsically any worse (or better) than friendships or any other type of relationship, despite failing to hit the mark much more often. I'd be more inclined to blame that tendency to the writers and they're preconceived notion of what "romance" should be like rather than the concept itself.

It's hardly a video game only problem, by the way. And it's not just good writers who fall for it, really. To me that Chris Avellone interview where he was questioned on the topic actually suggests in a really ironic way that he himself is affected by the same attitude.

You are absolutely right. The problem is that they usually fail to hit the mark . I also think the preconceived notions of what a "romance" is has a lot tot to do in this failing. Interesting what you mention about the Avellone interview since his are one of few romances that really stand out in my opinion. If you find the interview, please do share.

Edited July 5, 2014 by namelessthree

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's funny; you guys keep saying this, yet I remember when this whole forum went insane when they found out the game was going to have weapon durability. There was even a poll here in the general discussion. Didn't take Obsidian long to get rid of it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

@bonarbill I thought the poll was a bad idea. The question ought to have been settled through playtesting if the designers couldn't make up their mind about it.

Trial balloons are not the same thing as design by poll though. If a designer wants to find out what the general feeling is about a particular idea, there's nothing wrong with floating it and seeing how it goes down, or up, depending. Polls are bad though because they create the expectation that the result determines the design, and a secondary expectation that other similar ideas are also decided by poll.

2

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

@bonarbill I thought the poll was a bad idea. The question ought to have been settled through playtesting if the designers couldn't make up their mind about it.

Trial balloons are not the same thing as design by poll though. If a designer wants to find out what the general feeling is about a particular idea, there's nothing wrong with floating it and seeing how it goes down, or up, depending. Polls are bad though because they create the expectation that the result determines the design, and a secondary expectation that other similar ideas are also decided by poll.

Obsidian has done several polls and always followed their own minds regardless. in the announcement forum there is a poll with a 75% rating for another kickstarter round, and yet, they've still decided not to follow the crowd. I think that shows quite well that they can make up their own minds and aren't designing by committee even when they do ask for our views.

1

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.---Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

However, the extra stretchgoal poll was not quite the same thing, as it wasn't about a design decision but about funding. To my knowledge they haven't polled about design decisions, even if they have floated a number of trial balloons.

Look at T:ToN. They did call a poll about combat style. The upshot was that (1) when they made the poll, they already had a clear design preference, which they stated, (2) the poll was nearly evenly split, and (3) it caused a lot—like, really, a LOT—of bad blood among the backers. Many RTwP partisans felt that inXile was unfairly skewing the polling by indicating where they stood, and when the poll was nearly evenly split, a lot of them were really, really upset. The poll was a mistake.

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

However, the extra stretchgoal poll was not quite the same thing, as it wasn't about a design decision but about funding. To my knowledge they haven't polled about design decisions, even if they have floated a number of trial balloons.

Look at T:ToN. They did call a poll about combat style. The upshot was that (1) when they made the poll, they already had a clear design preference, which they stated, (2) the poll was nearly evenly split, and (3) it caused a lot—like, really, a LOT—of bad blood among the backers. Many RTwP partisans felt that inXile was unfairly skewing the polling by indicating where they stood, and when the poll was nearly evenly split, a lot of them were really, really upset. The poll was a mistake.

I don't think the poll was a bad idea. They had two good options. If 90% of the players had gone with RTwP, problably Numenara combat will be RTwP today and that is probably as good as the game being turn based. I voted turn based in that poll by the way and I would been fine if the results would have been RTwP. The problem is when you want it your way no matter what and without any reasoning. That's what brings bad blood but I don't think that's either Inxile nor the poll's fault but more about a question of maturity.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Romance would be a nice addition but is hardly necessary and more importantly does not lower the quality or experience of the game. It's the 1st adventure after all, have patience 'till PoE2, or, even better, use your imagination to fill the gaps and decide whom your protagonist romances with.

The game does not have to offer all in the plate.

2

Matilda is a Natlan woman born and raised in Old Vailia. She managed to earn status as a mercenary for being a professional who gets the job done, more so when the job involves putting her excellent fighting abilities to good use.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Someone nuke this thread already. The decision has been made, they heard the promancers pleas but have no time to implement it. You can hope for an implementation of this in a future PoE installment, but for now just deal with it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

OP joins forum 02 July 2014 and first instinct is to start the 40th romance thread (5 months after Obsidian made the 'No Romance' announcement).

0/10

Yes, because I was absolutely aware that there were 40 posts threads about the subject before mine. - Sigh- No dude, I just created the post when I heard about the romance issue myself.

Romance would be a nice addition but is hardly necessary and more importantly does not lower the quality or experience of the game. It's the 1st adventure after all, have patience 'till PoE2, or, even better, use your imagination to fill the gaps and decide whom your protagonist romances with.

The game does not have to offer all in the plate.

You are right. Seems like the game will be awesome either way, or at least, I hope so. There is not much else to say after all the comments that have come in the last day. Maybe only thank those kind enough to respond politely, and thank even more to those which engaged in constructive dialogue. It was really welcomed.

Edited July 5, 2014 by namelessthree

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

@namelessthree It's generally considered good form to lurk a bit and generally familiarize yourself with the environment before jumping in. Otherwise you might inadvertently step in some doo-doo, which is kind of what happened here.

I for one appreciate your intentions and the generally good grace with which you've handled this thread, but srsly -- you wouldn't have had to do much homework to notice that this is if not exactly a minefield, at least a field recently inhabited by a large number of ruminants with poor digestion. For example, type "romance" into the search field at top right, and then notice the large number of locked threads about it. Bit of a giveaway that, really.

3

I have a project. It's a tabletop RPG. It's free. It's a work in progress. Find it here: www.brikoleur.com

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

PJ - He's familiar enough with the search feature to necro the Baldur's Gate 3 thread from 13 September 2012. Either that or he scanned through 120 pages to find it in which case he would have certainly seen the other 39 useless threads on this issue.

Also, Namelessthree, I'm not a 'dude'.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

@namelessthree It's generally considered good form to lurk a bit and generally familiarize yourself with the environment before jumping in. Otherwise you might inadvertently step in some doo-doo, which is kind of what happened here.

I for one appreciate your intentions and the generally good grace with which you've handled this thread, but srsly -- you wouldn't have had to do much homework to notice that this is if not exactly a minefield, at least a field recently inhabited by a large number of ruminants with poor digestion. For example, type "romance" into the search field at top right, and then notice the large number of locked threads about it. Bit of a giveaway that, really.

You are right, but to be honest I am not much of a forum user, so thanks for the tips. Regarding the forum itself, you wouldn't believe how I get into this post to respond, it takes me a lot of clicks because I don't seem to find anything so I guess that explains something XD. EDIT: I still haven't found that search bottom in the top right that you mentioned. Yes, I know, I am a loser with this kind of things XD.

Maybe only thank those kind enough to respond politely, and thank even more to those which engaged in constructive dialogue. It was really welcomed.

Well you did start off by implying anyone not romantically interested in the people around them is a psychopath.

Sorry If you felt ofended. But that is not quite right. I mentioned nothing about the people here (obviously!), I was talking about the characters. And you have to admit that if your character has zero options to express their romantical feelings for a long period of time, said character is either asexual, a person that has serious problems socializing (psychopath) or simply someone not really really interested in any kind of romantical connection. I didn't explicitly said that your character has to be forcibly a psychopath. Again, sorry if you felt ofended but I was talking about the roleplaying.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

PJ - He's familiar enough with the search feature to necro the Baldur's Gate 3 thread from 13 September 2012. Either that or he scanned through 120 pages to find it in which case he would have certainly seen the other 39 useless threads on this issue.

Also, Namelessthree, I'm not a 'dude'.

I can assure you that I found that post randomly while trying to search stuff. Think what you like, really. But sorry about the "dude". I use it in a general way because my girlfriend (american) does too with either boys or girls.